دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی ارزش حسابرسی بخش عمومی: ادبیات و تاریخ - الزویر 2018

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the value of financial statement auditing in the public sector. The study applies theory about auditing from the private sector as well as the public sector to explore ways in which public sector auditing can be expected to be valuable. It shows that there are a number of complementary explanations that can be applied to examine the value of public audit, including agency, signaling, insurance, management control, governance and confirmation explanations. The evidence from research and history is generally consistent with the agency and management control explanations. There is some support for the signaling and insurance explanations, while research evidence suggests that governance has differing impact in the public sector compared to the private. The confirmation hypothesis is also potentially relevant. Reviewing the history of the development of public sector auditing functions shows that at least some developments were consistent with explanations such as agency theory and management control. Auditing in the public sector is an area where more research is valuable. The paper concludes with a discussion of issues for further investigation.

5. Discussion and issues for further investigation

The literature review and the review of history show a number of themes. One of these is existence of multiple complementary explanations for why auditing is valuable. Agency relationships are particularly important in explaining the value of auditing, and these are more complicated in the public sector. Auditing for management control has always been important as well. Specific areas in which we suggest that further research will be productive include comparative studies of Supreme Audit Institutions and their impact; examination of changing governance practices in the public sector and their impact on auditing; more investigation of how and why institutions were created the way that they are; reconciliation of the differences between the two major areas of research, the alternative and the mainstream; and more extensive examination of the demand for value for money auditing.

We observe that it is not well-documented just how much public sector auditing varies among countries. In discussing issues with public sector auditors and researchers, we found that the full extent of variations among jurisdictions was often not appreciated. A research approach that would be productive is to examine the economic impact of the form of Supreme Audit Institution (as in, e.g., Blume & Voigt, 2011). This investigation could start with a more complete comparison of the different ways in which public sector auditing is practiced in different jurisdictions. These include the Westminster model, the court model, and the board model; SAIs that cover all of the public sector compared to those that cover only central federal government; or other approaches such as centralised appointment and contracting out of auditors. Further development of this approach could then proceed to examine why these variations exist, and what impact they have on public sector financial information, efficiency and effectiveness.